About your Search

20130125
20130125
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
. it keeps ballooning. we will have this debt ceiling fight which will begin in a few weeks and then we will be back to square one. what we have faith in these guys? >> well, let me mention another statistic to give emphasis to this point that they cannot predict with these deficits and the spending will be like. you know, on the interest-rate issue, if we just have a 100 basis point increase in interest rate, that adds $1 trillion to the debt of the next ten years. these numbers are incredibly sensitive to changes in the economy, employment, interest rates, inflation. but when congress cannot find another. that is the problem with these budgets. it emphasizes, start to make long-term changes in the law with respect to the way these entitlements work. and if you do that you can change over a long time the direction of how much these programs like social security, medicare, medicaid go into debt. [talking over each other] >> i just wanted to come in here. they would not even consider another ratings downgrade last the medium term budget was not satisfactory, so they're not even looking f
on the debt ceiling and fight -- live to fight another day, he really is looking more and more like a 2016 possibility because he is trying to recast the posture of the party. >> i don't know where he gets tough sacrifices. what he asked before, and now he wants to do a budget of ten years that will balance the budget. you know, to do that would require even more drastic cuts that i think he knows democrats will not go along with. that's going to be difficult. i think it's a question of what issues do they take off the table like immigration as well as how they approach the budget and build out their own coalition, which they haven't figured out yet. >> and we see transitions tim geithner, saying good-bye. he ligue really with the respect of the white house and respect of the markets? >> i think, you know, it's a question that paul krugman gets at in the "new york times" today. what et cetera the right path to ultimately create jobs and growth? >> do you still have to focus on the deficit, or will that take care of itself to some degree versus more budget cutting? this is a thing that geit
that the substance matters here. the republicans knew they couldn't fight president obama on the debt ceiling. they should have just extended it sbeerly. i think there are some republicans who learned some lessons who broke with the party to vote with aid for the victims of hurricane sandy. so i think this sort of meeting is sort of the top line of people wanting to say it's just organization. but i think below that, there are republicans who know their problems run deeper. >> i don't doubt that, but i think that the bad signal is, for example, how are you going to say you're going to have change re-elect the same chairman in reince priebus, who we learned this week, had clint east wo east's empty chair in his office. to have that as some symbol that you want to recognize other than if you use an example to show how you lost an election, how dumb we could be. i mean, what -- can you re-e lek elect this guy's chair? >> look, we are in a two-party system. but the parties recon fizz your themselves. so, for example, there was ultimately a moment when the party shifted and where those democrats h
have a bigging fight over the debt ceiling, that's going to push up interest rates and cause exactly the effect that you're worried about. >> so if we just put our head in the sand and say we're never going to worry about the debt ceiling, at what point do our creditors say, you know what? we're going to charge you a little more interest and that interest goes up to 6% on the $16 trillion? don't we just get to the same problem on a long-term approach by not dealing with the underlying -- >> congressman, i'm totally in favor of dealing with the budget. that's the point of the book we wrote called "white house burning," a dramatic enough title, i hope. >> okay. >> but the point is you need a balanced approach as was said at the beginning. >> mr. johnson, if i could -- it's my time. and i've heard the balanced approach now for a year and a half, and i heard it today from the panel. there's been $600 billion of additional revenue that is a result of the fiscal cliff negotiations. balanced approach to me was if you gave revenue, you got spending reforms. has the president offered any spen
the debt ceiling, which has the unfortunate downside that if you mess it up, the u.s. government defaults, and it's a financial catastrophe, this was a sign of maturity. i think on the republicans' part that let's make it about the budget. so the budget is now going to come to so-called continuing resolution. they're going to have to have a fight about a government shutdown. this is what they should be arguing about. what does the government spend money on? what should it spend money on? how much revenue should be coming in? let's make the argument about that, not about whether the government should default. >> you just -- >> -- i agree with him. >> no, i -- i just think everybody's too -- i mean the question i would ask austan i know we're going to break but i'd ask austan people are very bearish on growth. what if they're wrong and trend growth isn't 1.5 to 2, it's 2.5 to 3 or 3.5 to 4. what does that do to this discussion? >> thanks. we are -- >> i think people are going to be surprised. >> let's pick up on that note. richard bernstein, austan goolsbee are both with us for the rest of
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)